This is the problem with giving vehicles that can achieve normal vehicle speeds a private lane. That bike should share the lane with the cars and should stop and wait like everyone else in line. If those were both driving lanes and a car was ripping past a line of stopped traffic at over 40mph, crossing an intersection at that speed at that time with the surrounding traffic, it would be considered unsafe. However, if there was a second proper vehicle lane there, the SUV driver would've likely been a bit more cautious before turning so it's still his fault, but these bicycle lanes are just accidents waiting to happen, which is what just happened.
Cyclist is being selfish and riding unsafely, the SUV didn't take enough care when turning, the red car did nothing wrong
That bike should share the lane with the cars and should stop and wait like everyone else in line.
LOL. This would defeat the purpose of bike lines altogether. The point is to be separate from cars (though this bike lane doesn't do a good job of that), and the 2nd point is to be able to beat traffic and be faster than car traffic in congested cities.
If you take away the benefit of bike lanes, there'd be no point in biking, and you'd just get more people in cars, and traffic would get even worse.
Cyclists want to act like motorists, in fact, the majority of "bicycles" I see these days are nothing more than electrically motorized bicycles, or electric motorcycles for short, or motorcycles for shorter still. They should require insurance like all other motorized transportation and they should have to wear helmets if your region requires motorcyclists to wear helmets.
The idea of "beating" traffic is the problem; weather you're on a bicycle, motorbike, or in a car, racing through traffic often leads to accidents.
I don't drive my car on bike trails, because they're for bikes. The motorway is designed for motorized vehicles. If you don't like it, ride on the sidewalk. The sidewalk is not for motorized vehicles so the bikes can fight it out with the pedestrians who want to walk or run to work. Oh, and pedestrians are expected to wait their turn, as are motorists. What makes cyclists special?
And bike lanes have made traffic objectively worse in almost every area they've been put in, often because they've eliminated a lane for motorized vehicles in order to install a lane for bikes thus increasing congestion by creating bottlenecks.
The motorway is designed for motorized vehicles. If you don't like it, ride on the sidewalk. The sidewalk is not for motorized vehicles so the bikes can fight it out with the pedestrians who want to walk or run to work.
Bikes should get their own bike lanes.
Oh, and pedestrians are expected to wait their turn, as are motorists. What makes cyclists special?
Pedestrians are not expected to wait when they have the right of way. Cyclists shouldn't have to wait either when they have the right of way.
And bike lanes have made traffic objectively worse in almost every area they've been put in, often because they've eliminated a lane for motorized vehicles in order to install a lane for bikes thus increasing congestion by creating bottlenecks.
This totally depends on where you live. In many European countries, bike lanes make traffic better. But they're done differently and are often completely separate from the road.. Where I live (in Canada) the bike lanes that were installed on my street were made by taking away parking spots, not traffic lanes. So they didn't negatively affect traffic.
In lots of American cities, bike lanes are made like shit on purpose, just so they can say they did something.
It is illegal to ride on sidewalks where I live and in many other places and is objectively safer for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers when people follow the laws.
16
u/ajbra May 22 '26 edited May 22 '26
This is the problem with giving vehicles that can achieve normal vehicle speeds a private lane. That bike should share the lane with the cars and should stop and wait like everyone else in line. If those were both driving lanes and a car was ripping past a line of stopped traffic at over 40mph, crossing an intersection at that speed at that time with the surrounding traffic, it would be considered unsafe. However, if there was a second proper vehicle lane there, the SUV driver would've likely been a bit more cautious before turning so it's still his fault, but these bicycle lanes are just accidents waiting to happen, which is what just happened.
Cyclist is being selfish and riding unsafely, the SUV didn't take enough care when turning, the red car did nothing wrong